30's Diamond Stars - No love ?

[Archive]

Posted By: Todd C

Seems these cards take the back seat for the 1930's card issues. I know there is no Ruth or Gehrig but there are still plenty of stars from the period such as Grove, Foxx, Ott, Waner, Appling, Traynor, and others.

Collector thoughts ?

[Archive]

Posted By: Steve

Gotta admit, DStars are a back seater to those glossy Goudeys and the player likenesses are a bit crude, but I love the deco background art.

Grove @ Fenway and Al Lopez with the flying catchers mask are two favs.

[Archive]

Posted By: James Feagin

Crude? I think they are as accurate (if not more so) than the Goudey's (especially 1933).

[Archive]

Posted By: Shawn Chambers

Shhh... keep it down! After buying a lot of 12 Diamond Stars from a board member, I fell in love with the set and will be working on it slowly.

Lots of HOFers and great looking cards to me. I love the busy background imagery and geometric designs on them. Enough variations to make it interesting for the Master set builder, but still very affordable.

I'm hoping they stay in their current price range for years to come. I think it is a great 30s set for a poor collector like me.

Best,

Shawn

[Archive]

Posted By: jeffdrum

No, that would be MP & Co. Now, that's crude. I love Diamond Stars!

[Archive]

Posted By: Kelly

One of the best cards ever, in my opinion, is the horizontal #70 Hal Troskey where it looks like he just hit a walk off homer and the catcher and the umpire are watching in amazement as the ball sails out of the yard. Don't have the card pic handy, but I am sure someone will be nice and post it.

I think this set has a following, but not as strong as 1933 goudey. Common goudeys are popular to own, trade, talk about and unfortunately common Diamond stars are not. That doesn't make them less beautiful cards.

[Archive]

Posted By: Todd C

[Archive]

Posted By: cmoking

[Archive]

Posted By: Todd C

I know this is a fake....but in my opinion a good one for Ruth in a Braves uniform.

[Archive]

Posted By: leon

As as type collector I get to play in many threads.......I bought this Grove raw (and still is) and it's pretty nice for the #1 card....

[Archive]

Posted By: davidcycleback

I agree with you, Todd, that the cards seem underappreceated. Not only do they have nice designs, but the designs are unlike any other baseball cards. I would think that if any Pre-War standard issues will go up in price, it would be these cards.

[Archive]

Posted By: S Gross

I think they're great, and if I every get into the '30's, I'd go for them.

What I really like is actually the back grounds; minor glimpes of everyday baseball, i.e. an umpire, two players hanging out, a batting cage, etc. There's one, I don't know the player, but in the background, there's a player sitting on a rolled up rain tarp, great stuff !!

[Archive]

Posted By: john wondowski

The Foxx card was always one of my favorites!

[Archive]

Posted By: Jimmy

I have always liked these cards, great detail and color

Jimmy

[Archive]

Posted By: jeffdrum

Signed Too:

[Archive]

Posted By: Richard Cline - RC

I agree... sharp looking cards. Mine were acquired when I purchased a lot and have never added to them due to other pursuits but they really are unique and colorful.

RC

[Archive]

Posted By: Rob

who was the photographer for this issue? anyone have any of the photographs?

Rob

[Archive]

Posted By: Chris Counts

I agree Diamond Stars are underrated, but I believe 30s cards are in general. The Diamond Stars, despite the lack of respect, are still probably the second most popular set of the decade. Batter-Ups (my personal favorite) and '39 Play Balls get even less love from vintage collectors. I realize I'm in the minority here, but the 30s are my favorite decade for cards, as well as baseball in general ...

[Archive]

Posted By: Anthony N.

<<I realize I'm in the minority here, but the 30s are my favorite decade >>

I"m with you completely- my favorite era for cards, and my favorite era of American history.

How can you not love this design?


And an era that produced these:

[Archive]

Posted By: JimB

I only have a handful personally, but I think it is a great looking set.
JimB

[Archive]

Posted By: howard

That portrait of Heinie Manush actually looks more like Lou Gehrig to me. Any chance that they designed it as a Gehrig card and changed the hat logo after not being able to come to terms with him?

Howard

[Archive]

Posted By: cmoking

To me, the Diamond Stars Manush resembles the Goudey Manush, so I don't think Gehrig has anything to do with it.

[Archive]

Posted By: Tyler

I am not the owner of, or seller of any of the '35 Diamond Stars, but do you think the existance of this thread could increase the sale prices of these cards now? I am only into early 20th century stuff, but now am interested in this set because of this thread. How much influence does this board have in the prices/notariaty of certain issues? I am sure this topic has been discussed, but would like to know...not only for this set, but others, as well.

[Archive]

Posted By: Brad Green

http://www.bandkgreen.net/diamond_stars

[Archive]

Posted By: Arthur Lobbe

The thing that prompted me to put it together was that it was a great looking set, numerous Hall of Famers and all cards are more affordable than those of the other major Pre-War sets making it easier to complete.

[Archive]

Posted By: PC

The artwork on the 1934-36 Diamond Stars Manush is taken from the same photo that appears on the 1934-36 Batter-Up Manush.

[Archive]

Posted By: Chris Counts

Does anyone have a scan of George Selkirk? I've always thought the player on Selkirk's card looked like Lou Gehrig ...

[Archive]

Posted By: Bob

is that you don't have the doggone rookie card collector/maniacs all over it like you do in the 38 Goudey set.

[Archive]

Posted By: William Cohon

Of course there's a great Greenberg rookie! And the Tony Piet card looks like what Matisse would have come up with, had he been inspired to do a set of baseball cards. I put the set together - minus the high numbers. I can't make myself part with major bucks for duplicate pictures. But I do love the set. And the artwork for the never-published 1937 set was discovered and printed up by Fritsch. It's an ersatz set that's mighty interesting!

[Archive]

Posted By: davidcycleback

I predicted the prices would go up as I thought they would go up, not because I thought I could influence their prices. Their existence and look of the issue is no secret to the hobby.

One bonus to the issue is that, unlike the Goudeys, some of the original paintings for the cards exist and you can buy those too.

[Archive]

Posted By: Pennsylvania Ted

Do we know for sure which major set has the 1st Greenberg card....1934 Goudey or the Diamond Stars set ?

The bio on the back of Greenberg's D/S card refers to his Batting Averages (Reg. and WS) in the 1934 season.
Therefore, a 1935 issue.

I don't have the D/S "Greenburg" error card....perhaps, this card was issued in 1934 ?

TED Z

[Archive]

Posted By: barrysloate

I thought the 1934 Goudey was the rookie, but there probably isn't universal agreement.

[Archive]

Posted By: Pennsylvania Ted

You are correct about Greenberg's 1934 Goudey card. Greenberg's (or Greenburg) D/S cards are #54....which were
issued in the 2nd (or mid-Series) in 1935.

TED Z

[Archive]

Posted By: Jon Canfield

Jeff - here is another signed one...